CCDL Mission Statement

[Wife of Protector]

imported post

The Connecticut Citizens' Defense League is a non-partisan, grassroots organization devoted to advocating rights affirmed by the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Connecticut. We are especially dedicated to protecting the inalienable right of all people to keep and bear arms, for the defense of both self and state, through public enlightenment and legislative action.

We welcome anyone who believes that the defense of our civil rights is critical to the longevity of our freedom and to the success of this nation, and in particular that the rights to self defense, and thearms to actualize that defense,are fundamental and undeniable.

I believe this is the latest iteration of the proposed Mission Statement, and I have three changes to suggest for everyone's consideration:

The Connecticut Citizens' Defense League is a non-partisan, grassroots organization devoted to advocating rights affirmed by the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Connecticut. We are especially dedicated to protecting the unalienable right of allcitizens to keep and bear arms, for the defense of both self and state, through public enlightenment and legislative action.

We welcome anyone who believes that the defense of ourconstitutional rights is critical to the longevity of our freedom and to the success of this nation, and in particular that the rights to self defense, and thearms to actualize that defense,are fundamental and undeniable.

There is a difference between constitutional and civil rights, and I believe we are focusing on the constitutional rights.

 

[Lenny Benedetto]

imported post

Wife of Protector wrote:

The Connecticut Citizens' Defense League is a non-partisan, grassroots organization devoted to advocating rights affirmed by the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Connecticut. We are especially dedicated to protecting the inalienable right of all people to keep and bear arms, for the defense of both self and state, through public enlightenment and legislative action.

We welcome anyone who believes that the defense of our civil rights is critical to the longevity of our freedom and to the success of this nation, and in particular that the rights to self defense, and thearms to actualize that defense,are fundamental and undeniable.

I believe this is the latest iteration of the proposed Mission Statement, and I have three changes to suggest for everyone's consideration:

The Connecticut Citizens' Defense League is a non-partisan, grassroots organization devoted to advocating rights affirmed by the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Connecticut. We are especially dedicated to protecting the unalienable right of allcitizens to keep and bear arms, for the defense of both self and state, through public enlightenment and legislative action.

We welcome anyone who believes that the defense of ourconstitutional rights is critical to the longevity of our freedom and to the success of this nation, and in particular that the rights to self defense, and thearms to actualize that defense,are fundamental and undeniable.

There is a difference between constitutional and civil rights, and I believe we are focusing on the constitutional rights.

I did a quick Thesaurus check of the difference between "unalienable and inalienable"

Here is whatI found

1) inalienable - incapable of being repudiated or transferred to another; "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights



2) inalienable - not subject to forfeiture; "an unforfeitable right"



1) unalienable - incapable of being repudiated or transferred to another; "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights"



Maybe this was not the best thesaurus on the web since in both explanations theyactually use the wordunalienable in their #1 explanation. Inalinable also had a second explanation attached.



Protectors Wife other than not being sure of the correct word being "UN" or "IN".



I think the other 2 changes that you made are TOP NOTCH and state our purpose better than the original version.

 

[romma]

imported post

Sounds like we are close. That is if this process does not get objected to.And if someone has other ideas I hope they do speak up soon.

 

[Wife of Protector]

imported post

Lenny,

It's really just a symantic difference between un and in...I just went with un because that is what is used in the Declaration of Independence. However, according to Webster'sEncyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, the definition of unalienable is inalienable, and the definition of inalienable is inviolable. So it really doesn't matter which we use.

 

[bennettprescott]

imported post

I prefer using "rights of all people" versus "rights of all citizens" as, citizen or not, all human beings have a right to self defense and a right to arms, and we should advocate from that position. We are all simply lucky enough to live in a society where those rights are (somewhat) constitutionally protected.

 

[Wife of Protector]

imported post

I think that making the distinction of citizens is important, because if anyone who happens to be in this country can bear arms, they may well choose to use them against us. Not trying to sound paranoid, but I believe this is a valid argument. Once we get our own rights protected and clearly defined, then we can go help the rest of the world. As citizens, we not only have rights, we also have responsibilities. As has become painfully obvious, non-citizens may not feel so obliged.

 

[GoldCoaster]

imported post

bennettprescott wrote:

I prefer using "rights of all people" versus "rights of all citizens" as, citizen or not, all human beings have a right to self defense and a right to arms, and we should advocate from that position. We are all simply lucky enough to live in a society where those rights are (somewhat) constitutionally protected.

If you're a citizen of another country, here legally, you are also entitled to the protection of your rights same as any other law abiding person.

This much I know, because I am one. I consider myself a citizen of CT since I've lived here in my house for 18 years, however I am not a US citizen, which gives me a unique perspective coming from a country where nobody can own handguns any more and very few can own long guns either.

 

[romma]

imported post

Rights Of The Lawful Residents Of This State.

 

[Wife of Protector]

imported post

While not turning this into a discussion on immigration policy, I believe that if you are a citizen of another country, legally living in the US and properly registered with INS, you are a defacto citizen in all respects, excluding voting rights. This means you most definately have the right to bear arms, just as you have the responsibility to uphold the laws and pay taxes (aren't we all just plain lucky..hahha). However, illegal, or undocumented persons here a different story.

 

[GoldCoaster]

imported post

Wife of Protector wrote:

While not turning this into a discussion on immigration policy, I believe that if you are a citizen of another country, legally living in the US and properly registered with INS, you are a defacto citizen in all respects, excluding voting rights. This means you most definately have the right to bear arms, just as you have the responsibility to uphold the laws and pay taxes (aren't we all just plain lucky..hahha). However, illegal, or undocumented persons here a different story.

Exactly, and I don't have an issue with putting "citizen" in the mission statement either because I do consider myself as such with regards to Connecticut.

And I agree with you 100% - if you're here legally, great, if you are illegally here then you can't be considered a citizen of the state of Connecticut no matter how much spin you put on it.

 

[PRO2ND]

imported post

While not turning this into a discussion on immigration policy, I believe that if you are a citizen of another country, legally living in the US and properly registered with INS, you are a defacto citizen in all respects, excluding voting rights. This means you most definately have the right to bear arms, just as you have the responsibility to uphold the laws and pay taxes (aren't we all just plain lucky..hahha). However, illegal, or undocumented persons here a different story.

I agree with this also.

 

[littlemike]

imported post

Well, after tonight's meeting it looks like it's all worked out and we can submit the "New Improved" final draft to the State and get incorporated.

 

[romma]

imported post

Yes it did Mike. Nice to meet you tonight!

 

[WhirlyBird]

imported post

It was great meeting everyone tonight. What a great bunch!! See you all next time.

~ Heli

 

[PRO2ND]

imported post

Yes it was. Looking forward to moving ahead with this.